MIG: PSN vs. Xbox Live

MyInsideGamer writes:

"About a month ago I was discussing ideas for articles with Robert online, I mentioned that I thought a comparison on Xbox Live and PSN would be a great addition to the site, make a nice article for others to read. "Great Idea" Robert commented. Ha. Since this little chat I have been putting together notes and drafts of this very piece. Simple I thought but there were so many ways to compare the two services, ways of making the points count."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
DigitalEnemy4223d ago

Well written article. I'm a PS3 gamer and as a overall service the PSN holds it's own against Microsofts subscription service. If Sony can release a few more social features in upcoming firmware revisions ( XGC) obviously being the main benefit, PSN will have caught up feature wise.

Ofcourse, online gaming is about gaming,not social tools. So when it boils down to it both consoles offer exactly the same experiances. Sony may edge it with dedicated servers. Also PSN can host bigger multiplayer games ( MAG) etc, but that I guess is more down to the hardware power than actual online service...

Both services are great that's all what matters to us gamers !

vflhp4223d ago

Thanks for the comment, compliment and opinion!

sugard04222d ago

I agree with the article.... not 100%, but I agree with the overall winner.
I feel you could have stated that Themes on the PS3 are free, and that the Internet Browser allows you access.... well... the WORLD WIDE WEB, which mean Facebook and Twitter are at your finger tips also.

But in regards to the community aspect, I think XBL just "edges" out the PSN. My reason for this is the fact that when you highlight a friend, all the information is available to you, right there and then. On PSN its a different story, as you will have to click on a persons profile and then wait for the trophy images to load, and if you want to compare trophies, you have to wait for the server to sync your trophies and then wait for the trophies of your friend to load. (Obviously a minor gripe, but accessibility is a key factor in a seamless online UI)

Thats it really. I dont think Cross game chat is that important, but thats just me.

Oh and I agree with the XBL vs PSN point that you made about, how the people treat you on the Network. XBL has alot of screaming and immature children in comparison to PSN, but I guess its to be expected when the XBOX 360 is cheaper than a Wii and is bundled with a headset.

mrb3ar4222d ago

seriously, thanks for 1st comment - It has given me a little more hope in N4G. An article like this attracts the you know whos, but im happy to see there are still some good gamers out there.

on topic: This article was fair, informative, and breaks down a lot of elements for those who may have misconceptions about the online experience each console has to offer. I know someone that is looking to finally purchase a ps3 or 360 and isn't up to date with what each console has.

I can't wait for XGC for PSN.

DMason4222d ago

I have a feeling these opinion pieces are going to keep popping up. Everytime a new blog rises, they need a flamebait piece to draw attention to their new site.

All this is simply conjecture. You cannot compare the two and offer a clear winner based on opinion. Unless there is hardcore facts and evidence, it all comes down to preference. Just like Pepsi vs Coke.

Cryos4222d ago (Edited 4222d ago )

I appreciate the fact that this article recognizes the subtle differences in the two networks. The author made valid points for each, without any fanboi-ism, and came to a conclusion.

My opinion though, is that because the two networks are so close, feature wise, that it doesn't make sense to pay for a service when another is free. I also don't like the idea that if for whatever reason I can't pay for the service, I lose out on certain Achievements, and sometimes half of the gameplay. For those reasons, PSN edges LIVE for me...

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 4222d ago
Godmars2904223d ago

What the critics need to be doing now is gearing up for when Sony announces and/or delivers their subscription plan. If it does include cross game chat the 360 camp will surely claim a victory, never mind that base access to online gaming through PSN is free or that trophies aren't tied to paid subscriptions. Unlike XBL.

The_Zeitgeist4223d ago

Cross game voice chat is not the be all end all of this debate. PSN is a great service and mostly everyone that uses it doesn't complain.

Godmars2904223d ago

And yet when you hear the argument cross game chat is the first and key point that the 360 camp bring up. In their eyes that's the only thing that matters.

Omega44222d ago

"that trophies aren't tied to paid subscriptions"

Since when do you have to pay to use achievements?

vflhp4222d ago

I don't think the author said you had. I think he was referring to the fact that Sony have confirmed if they bring in premium PSN services, trophies will remain free to use.

Raf1k14222d ago

That's probably because it's the biggest difference between the two services.

Godmars2904222d ago (Edited 4222d ago )

Still not the same as basic access, which you have to pay for on XBL. When the 360 argue/defend the point they tend to use extra features such as cross game chat, Netflix and facebook. Meanwhile things like the PS3's browser, its dedicated servers or that offers larger player networks tend to be ignored and outright dismissed.

Like I said before, when/if PSN gets a paid subscription service that give extra features the 360 camp will call it a victory. Meanwhile PSN's basics will still be free where XBL's wont.

mastiffchild4221d ago

Well, to me X game chat is a nothing feature anyway and one I'd personally be far happier without on any service let alone one I think is worth any of the fuss made over it. I firmly think the reason it's become such a bone of contention is because it's one of the very few things Gold sub holders have that PSN hasn't added. To me it's degraded, if anything, the quality of my experience on Live-if I'm involved myself it puts me off and I feel it does the same to others and when I'm playing team based games(I love TF2) I find it REALLY can damage the gaming for both teams and that's without touching on people cheating using it. It isn't an issue that can be solved by muting people or just not doing it yourself either as all your teammates and all the other team could be chatting to people and letting the game slip inot madness-and it's difficult enough getti8ng two good TF2 teams as you'll know! WSo when you get the petrfect game and it happens it very annoying and is the main reason that I've ended up playing so little on Live(only played Halo3 now and again in the end) that I finally sacked my sub and moved all my online gaming to PSN-with a little L4D on PC.

Onviously, I know i'm in a minority but, also, I know I'm not alone and guarantee that a few on either side going on about Xgame chat either dion't or wouldn't use it much themselves and of those who haven't used it/had a Live account I guarantee some would feel the damn same as I do. Either way it really isn't worth the arguments that go on in it's name all the bloody time.

Whatever, I don't like it and would go as far as to say it's undesirable and the reason I no longer pay my sub. Would I feel the same about it if Live were free,t hough, IDK, but probably while there's still a PSN that I can avoid it on I suppose I would. Certainly, though, with or without cross game chat there isn't as many differences as some would have us believe and the fact everyone has mic access on Live is a far bigger difference(though, again, is it good or bad when a mic costs a fiver anyway? If you wanna talk it's not like Sony are stopping anyone , is it?)in setting the feel of the services but, imo, Live suffers when it, as the supposed premium service, lags nehind in things which make the omnline gaming quality actually better like the number of games with dedicated servers. They make a real difference, imo, and if MS did the sensible thing and made them mandatory for all devs wanting their games on Live they'd have the best service and this argument would be totally moot. As it stands Sony holds more games using dedicateds (though not nearly enough when you look at PC)and it's not something that enough people say when supporting PSN or when pointing out Live's weaknesses. Definitely, it's a far bigger issue than bloody x game chat will ever be and any console online service that could boast near blanket dedicated servers would, for me, win this part of the war hands down and it puzzles me why MS haven't pushed more devs towards deliverimng them-think about the Gears2 fiasco: Had Epic been forced into investing a little in servers how many of the issues that crippled it at the start would have been non starters? How many of the niggles that remain would have been negated by them? To me it's a far better thing to moan to MS and Sony about than little social features that only the terminally impatient will ever truly appreciate or use that much.Seriously, is waiting to the end of a match that big a problem to everyone?

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 4221d ago

This debate grows tiresome.I want to play an online game with friends with minimal problems? Both services afford this.
I want to download the latest DLC and demos, effortlessly? Both provide this.
I like to feel rewarded for grinding away in my fave games,whether by trophy or achievement.Both again provide this.
I want to( occasionally ) chat with gaming acquaintances and friends,in a simple but effective manner.Both allow for this.
As I have asked before,If both were free would we even be having this debate?
In my opinion the question is this; At what point does Xgame-chat go from redundancy to pre-requisite?

vflhp4222d ago

In a way you're right, but this article mainly looks at the smaller aspects. Both have pros and cons over the other, so we wanted to stack 'em up and find the best.

Godmars2904222d ago

But at the end of the day it doesn't matter which is better. If you want to play multiplayer Uncharted 2 you have to play it on a PS3 and use PSN, just like your only option for Halo 3 is XBL.

Though the argument of someone wanting to play UC2 not having to pay extra for it vs the guy playing Halo 3 will remain. That the only justification the Halo 3 guy has is the ability to talk to someone playing MW2 and being able to jump between either game

ape0074222d ago

argument,stop it

let everyone enjoy his respective service

psn or xbl


swiftshot934222d ago

I agree that Xbox LIVE is superior just because its easier to connect with friends. Game invites across all games, 8 person cross game party system, and a better friends list all make LIVE better IMO. Whether or not its worth the $50 is up to you...

When it comes to games, its really a tie these days. This year Xbox had Shadow Complex, Trials HD, and 'Splosion Man. PSN had flower, Pixel Junk Shooter and Shatter. There isnt a 'clear winner' so thats also up to personal preference.

kneon4222d ago

All those aspects that are easier to use on live (invites, friends list etc) are exactly the things I don't care about. I wouldn't even have anyone on my friends list except my daughter keeps bugging me to accept some of invites I keep getting. I've never wanted to chat or invite someone to a game, I don't look at their gamer cards and I couldn't care less what game they are playing or whether they are online.

I understand that for a lot of people this is important, especially with the teen demographic that Live seems to have the bigger share of, but for me and plenty of others it holds no value.

I just want to get online and play, that's it.

albert_2754222d ago


You don't have friends online? Then you are in the uber-minority, as everybody else does.
I absolutely love the simplicity of joining and inviting friends on xbox live. The mini-dashboard seems really well designed to allow easy access to your friends.
PSN, on the other hand, you can't do to easily. It doesn't necessarily take a whole lot more button presses, but it's just not as easy.

kneon4222d ago (Edited 4222d ago )

Nope, no real friends online, I'm 44 so most of my friends don't play video games, and even those that do aren't on my friends list. I have no idea who the people on my friends list are or why they even asked to add me as a friend. I don't ever communicate with them in any way. Yes I'm an online antisocial hermit :)

I have seen first hand how these features are better integrated on Live than they are on PSN so only an idiot would say PSN is better in this area. If you only compared feature for feature then there isn't much difference except for x-game chat, but the integration is better on

The surveys I've seen and my own experience with both services indicate that the PSN demographic is older than on Live and I think these features matter more to a younger audience. Sony have done really well since the price drop and have likely pulled in a lot more of the younger audience but they need to continue to improve if they are to get dual console owners to choose PSN over Live. If they can do that then they may see comparatively better sales of multi-platform titles. But it will take time. For anyone that cares about these features, what is even more important than how easy it is to use is whether your friends are on the same service. If they aren't then it doesn't matter how slick or easy to use you make it.

Show all comments (51)
The story is too old to be commented.